I cover the video game industry, write about gamers, and review video games.
You can follow me on Twitter and hit me up there if you have any questions or comments you'd like to chat about.
Disclosure: Many of the video games I review were provided as free review copies. This does not influence my coverage or reviews of these games.
I do not own stock in any of the companies I cover. I do not back any Kickstarter projects related to video games. I do not fund anyone in the industry on Patreon.

Carol equips her gaming rig with an Intel CPU, the i5-3550P to be precise, a 4-core 3.1Ghz chip. She pairs that with a Radeon HD 7850 with 2GB of DDR5 RAM and another 8 gigs of DDR3 RAM for system memory.

RAM-BO

Let’s take a look at the memory first. In the PC set-up, we have 8 gigs of common DDR3 RAM, but Sony has somehow crammed the same amount of GDDR5 RAM into its PS4.

GDDR5 is primarily used in graphics chips. It’s not something you see used as system RAM at all.

For instance, the nVidia “Titan” GPU, which costs $1000 by itself, has just 6GB of GDDR5 RAM, and that’s still all reserved for the GPU. You’ll be hard-pressed to find any PC with GDDR5 plugged directly into the motherboard rather than sitting on the graphics card. This just isn’t how PCs work at the moment, though that will likely change.

GDDR5, while suffering from slightly higher latency, offers a substantial bandwidth boost over DDR3, and given the make-up of the integrated CPU/GPU chip in the PS4 this will translate to a substantial performance boost.

One Chip to rule them all

Next up we have the CPU/GPU configuration.

Again, what Sony has done with the PS4 is something that PC builders simply cannot do yet. PC’s come with two separate chips connected over a PCI-E chipset.

The PS4, on the other hand, houses an integrated CPU/GPU custom AMD chip—the “Jaguar” CPU is not available for purchase yet and the GPU side of the equation is said to be similar to AMD cards running in the $200 price-range. The secret weapon here isn’t either the 8-core CPU or the GPU, but rather how the two are paired.

Both the processor and the graphics card are built into the same chip and both tap into that 8GB of DDR5 memory at once—it’s a “unified memory” setup as opposed to the system your PC uses, with the CPU utilizing your DDR3 system memory and your GPU harnessing the more robust GDDR5.

What does this mean? Basically it means that the two chips will be able to communicate with one another much faster and more efficiently than in a traditional PC set-up. Combine this with the high-bandwidth GDDR5 memory and the fact that much of the traditional CPU tasks will be offloaded to the GPU, and you have a machine that you simply cannot compare to a modern PC.

Windows? We don’t need no stinking Windows

One expensive component I didn’t notice on Carol’s list was the operating system.

While you could go with a free Linux build, to get the most out of a gaming PC you’ll want to spend on a Windows install disc. You can still buy Windows 7 and you could probably find an OEM disc for around $99. But the costs of running Windows aren’t all monetary. Unlike a PC, the PS4 won’t need to bother with all those pesky PC applications. There will be no anti-virus software running in the background. A console is a closed system with all the benefits (and limitations) that entails.

In other words, what you can do with the PS4 hardware on a console is not the same thing as what you can do with the same, or similar, hardware in a PC.

This rule applies to game development as well. Consoles may be under-powered compared to their PC cousins, but they have advantages in terms of uniformity that make them very developer friendly. Developing games for a uniform system is a huge advantage over the PC market with its wildly diverse array of price and power points. Again, this convenience does come with its own set of disadvantages. In a few years, the PC will be much more powerful than the PS4, for instance.

The PS3 was no walk in the park for game development, but with a move to x86, Sony is making it much easier for developers to work with their platform. Standardization will also make it easier to port PS4 games to PC.

Finally, we don’t know what type of hard drive the PS4 will come equipped with. Will it be a traditional spindle-based drive or an SSD? Perhaps a hybrid solution? This, and the optical drive, will be the real performance bottlenecks in the system and in the PC you could theoretically build to compare it with.

The fact is, no matter how you slice or dice it, you can’t build a PC with the same specs or performance as the PS4. You could almost certainly build something faster and more powerful, but it will cost you more than the PS4 is likely going to cost.

None of that matters, however. PC gaming is great, but I’m a big tent guy. I like the participation of multiple systems in the market, and the PS4 will be a great competitor for the next generation of video games. The most important thing the system will have to offer will be its games.

There will be many PS4 exclusives that will only play on that machine. If you want to play those games, it won’t matter how amazing your gaming rig is—just like the PS4, however high-powered, will not have access to the entire breadth of titles available on PC.

Show me the money!

Either way, the console will almost certainly cost you less than a comparable gaming PC. Analysts are saying that $299 is the “magic price point” for the system, but I’m betting we don’t see under $399 at launch. That would still empty your wallet less than a gaming rig. Will it make the PS4 a money-loser for Sony?

Actually, I doubt it. Unlike your gaming rig, Sony’s CPU/GPU combo chip is much cheaper to manufacture. The heating solution for one chip is also cheaper, as is the fact that no operating system overhead exists. Indeed, all the parts—save for the RAM—should come at a pretty reasonable price. I’m not sure if Sony is taking a loss, but from what I’ve read it doesn’t appear to be the case—or at the very least, the loss won’t be dramatic. Then again, we don’t know the price of the machine yet, so this is guess work.

I can’t argue in favor of a system that hasn’t yet released, but I do think it’s important to note just how structurally unique the PS4 will be compared to its PC counterparts, at least for the time being. Not better, necessarily, but certainly different enough that any comparison is basically apples to oranges.

The good news for PC gamers is that this technology is likely coming our way as well, and we’ll undoubtedly see much more powerful configurations than anything in the PS4. But even if that future is rapidly approaching, it isn’t here just yet.

Update: Just to clarify, I’m not at all suggesting the PS4 will out-pace gaming PCs—though for the price (depending on the price) it may still make sense from a cost perspective. Nor am I suggesting that an APU is brand new to the PS4. Yes, integrated chips have been used in mobile computing, in laptops, etc.. No, this particular chip has not, and to my knowledge we have not seen an APU built to this spec before. I also realize that GDDR5 RAM is higher latency than DDR3. But it’s also higher bandwidth, so there’s a trade-off, and I suspect Sony has a very good reason for this. The fact is, as this post is attempting to point out, the architecture is different and we won’t really know what that means in terms of performance until we actually have systems to try it out on. PCs will still be better machines in the end, especially if you are willing to pay. And yes, as I say below, the PC will be more future proof as well.

But when people say they can build a PC with the same specs as the PS4, I simply must disagree. You can build one with better specs, but you’ll certainly pay for it. The PS4 is not a dream machine, and we’re not going to pay dream machine prices for it. Consoles will not be able to keep pace with the PC, and so it’s up to game makers to make compelling games for these systems. So long as the basic hardware is there—and I think it is—that’s the real crux of the matter. A console, by its very nature, is going to have to balance cost against performance. But they still have some distinct advantages (i.e. uniformity) of their own.

Post Your Comment

Post Your Reply

Forbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.

Comments

While your article was quite insightful otherwise, I do not agree that it is impossible to compare the PS4 and a gaming PC because they use different architecture. Can’t we still run performance tests on both and compare the results? It’s not the underlying architecture that matters in the end, it’s the actualy performance. That said, I think you raise a good point that the PS4 with it’s unique architecture might have achieved a performance/price ratio that cannot be achieved with a PC, especially since console games will always be easier to optimise because of the universal system. Emphasis on might though, I will wait until the PS4 is fully revealed before raising it’s laurels.

Why are they letting people who know nothing about modern PCs write articles on Forbes? Seriously, this guy is fucking clueless.

1. The speed/bandwidth of your ram makes no difference in gaming performance. http://cdn.overclock.net/c/cc/ccf5646d_39740.png

2. Many AMD CPUs have a GPU integrated on the die. Example: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113280 This does not necessarily make it any faster. The power packed in the GPU is largely what governs it’s performance.

3. PS4 is going to have far more overhead than any console to date. It’s going to need to keep far more working in the background than even the PS3. Also, SSDs are not going to make your games run any faster.

4. You have no idea how much a PS4 is going to cost. You can’t compare it’s cost to a PC. For all you know it could be $899 at launch.

Next time your editor wants tech news, stick to something you know and understand. Don’t pretend you know what you are talking about because someone like myself is going to call you out on your bullshit. In fact, looking back at your publication history, I am pretty sure you are just a rabid Sony fanboy.

Medium range gaming PC’s will have 2 or 3 gbs of GDDR5 plus 8gb of DDR3 memory. You should also not forget that ddr4 is coming, and it’s a pretty big leap from ddr3, if I’m not mistaken they’ve showed it running at 4ghz.

We have APU’s, they’re pretty common but they’re too weak for regular gaming PCs so that why we don’t usualy use ‘em.

Windows 7 (windows 8 blows) is pretty stable, you can do anything with it. Gaming, video editing, create music, edit pictures, spreadsheet work, programing… You can’t do any of that on any console.

Tretton from Sony America has stated that hopefuly the system will cost 600 dollars, he says that it depends on how low the price of the hardware gets during this year but we can be sure that it won’t be less than 500. For that money you can get a PC better than the ps4 if you choose your parts carefuly. Games are also much less expensive. Crysis 3 for the is available for 36 euros at g2play lol.

Overall, pc gaming is much more worthwhile. I have an old rig from 3 years ago that blows away the ps3 and xbox360 but it is a little bit less powerful than the new consoles will be. I’ll be buying an hd5770 exactly like what I already have and crossfire it, I will be getting about a 90% increase in performance, totaly destroying the new consoles. So yeah, pc gaming all the way.

Sure, APUs are typically too weak for gaming PCs. Will this last? Or will we start to see higher-powered APUs like the one in the PS4 coming to market (i.e. next-gen)? That being said, if I were to have to choose, I’d say go with a PC.

I’m not suggesting that the PS4 will outstrip gaming PCs by any means. The fact is, the PS4 will also not cost as much as most gaming PCs. Your FX-8350 costs, on its own, approximately $200. You likely spent five times that on the entire rig (at least.) Again, apples to oranges.

The whole entire base of this article is bashing PC gaming and you state that The PS4 is next-gen, while “PC isn’t”, and I prove the point that PC has still surpassed the PS4 even before it’s official release and you’re taking back your statement and making the argument that “It’s all about cost!” No, this isn’t an “apples to oranges”. You made a bias statement about one platform against another and you’re trying to get out of the original argument.

How much will PS4 cost? $499/£380 at least I would say. How much will the games cost? Will the price of them go up? There has been much talk of this. Console games will surely increase in cost, and at launch you pay full full whack for them. I remember walking into 3 stores a couple weeks after the launch of Xbox 360 and PS3 seeing games priced at full RRP- £45-£50. This lasted for months until they slowly dropped to £40.

Fact is all that time I NEVER, EVER paid more than £35 for a PC game. Actually I rarely pay more the £30, and a great deal of the time between £25-£30. For brand new titles, most of the time on disc!

I have consoles always have always will, but within the first year of a new console I save at least £200 on the cost of games alone if i go with a PC version. That doesn’t end after a year either.

Typical savings are £150 to £200 for games. If you have xbox live or whatever then that adds extra cost, every year.

PC gaming and the hardware easily pays for itself within a few years and the money saved can be spent on keeping relatively up to date. The worst part of yuor article is the consideration of costs, because that is stupidly short sighted.

People who consider costs when they go buy a car for example don’t just look at how much the car costs to buy, they also look at how much it costs to insure, or how much mileage it gets, or the cost of repairs potentially.

Running costs.

Its about time people trumpeting purchase costs of consoles over PC gaming start to wake up and use their brains to look at the whole cost argument in a more balanced light, rather than a stupidly narrow one.

I haven’t bought a gaming PC in ten years, I have however bought a case, three motherboards, three CPU’s, five sets of ram, about six hard drives, two PSU’s, and four graphics cards, on average I spend about £150 – £200 a year on PC parts, and get about £75 – £100 back selling the old parts. The point is, if your technically minded, you never have to actually buy a whole gaming rig, and gradually updating it can be pretty cheap.